Olgratin_Magmatoe

Shocker

The difference is self defense. As stated elsewhere in this thread, we should all agree its morally acceptable to kill nazis. With them, it's either kill or be killed. If we didn't step up against them in WW2 it would have been disastrous. And with CEOs, billionaires, and other business execs it's no different. They're actively killing everyone they can as quickly as they can because it makes them a quick buck.

So ultimately it boils down to self defense.

A state however gets no self defense out of capital punishment. It instead becomes a way to silence political opponents, innocents routinely are executed, and so on. The state cannot be granted the power to kill because it will abuse it. The people eventually need to defend themselves from the state when it is granted this power.

Sure there is. History is littered with examples. Though a more full explanation of the solution is probably a violation of the TOS.

IIRC the problem there is that it potentially makes you liable to be sued by the company for disclosing negative/private information. But they can't exactly hold you liable if you're dead, so if you're dead you may as well speak what you know from beyond the grave.

The idea here is that you're directly pulling from the panels as first priority to take a chunk off your utility bill. The energy it provides never needs stored, and it makes the load lighter for transporting green energy from elsewhere.

Absolutely. I was gonna edit my comment to include that but you beat me to the punch.

Very nice build, I love it

If the cops did indeed plant evidence then happy days for the defence since it should be easy to disprove. e.g. by simple handwriting analysis or other such means. But this is fantasy wishful thinking since he did write the words. So stick to the reality here

Handwriting analysis is hardly objective.

He shot the guy and confessed to it.

He's pleaded not guilty, and unless you have more up to date information, he's made no confession outside of the alleged note.

Ultimately, there is a better strategy to jury nullification:

https://beyondcourts.org/sites/default/files/2022-07/Jury-Nullification-Toolkit-English_0.pdf

TL;DR: It is most effective to plant seeds of doubt when reasonable, and legitimate ones. For this particular case, it would be the fact that the eyebrows don't match between pictures, the police said they had found the backpack in NY only to then say they found him with his backpack at McDonalds, the fact that Luigi claims shit was planted on him and the police have a running history of planting evidence to suit their needs, etc.

While it won't help you getting suicided, setting up a deadman's switch on the cloud that will release your testimony is definitely worth doing.

And that's why we fight back where we can and weaponize what we can; that's why we use jury nullification in cases like these.

It wasn't Luigi.

Geneally, you don't become a CEO without being a shitty person, and therefore a shitty parent.